My MBP has an SSD so it will automatically get changed to APFS when Iupgrade to High Sierra. So what should I do with my other drives? Ihave backup drives, data drives, etc., all of which can be accessed bythe MBP as well as other computers, like my Mini. Do I need to convertthem? How do I do that and what happens if I don't?

I use SupperDuper! to backup both the MBP and the Mini to differentpartitions on the same RAID array. I also backup my data drives to thesame system.

I'm told APFS is better so it seems like it would make sense to converteverything, but I don't even know if that is possible or how to do it!

Post by Robert PeirceMy MBP has an SSD so it will automatically get changed to APFS when Iupgrade to High Sierra. So what should I do with my other drives?

nothing.

Post by Robert PeirceI have backup drives, data drives, etc., all of which can be accessed bythe MBP as well as other computers, like my Mini. Do I need to convertthem? How do I do that and what happens if I don't?

no need and it's better if you don't.

Post by Robert PeirceI use SupperDuper! to backup both the MBP and the Mini to differentpartitions on the same RAID array. I also backup my data drives to thesame system.

Post by Robert PeirceI have backup drives, data drives, etc., all of which can be accessed bythe MBP as well as other computers, like my Mini. Do I need to convertthem? How do I do that and what happens if I don't?

Post by Robert PeirceI have backup drives, data drives, etc., all of which can be accessed bythe MBP as well as other computers, like my Mini. Do I need to convertthem? How do I do that and what happens if I don't?

Post by Robert PeirceI have backup drives, data drives, etc., all of which can be accessed bythe MBP as well as other computers, like my Mini. Do I need to convertthem? How do I do that and what happens if I don't?

I'm tracking SD!'s blog to stay on top of this. Since I have an SSDdrive and no choice on APFS, I am waiting to upgrade until I know itwill work.

There is a choice, but it's a bit of a muck-about to do it compared toApple simply having the option in the installer's GUI, as it shouldhave been. :-\

Sorry, I forgot to paste in the links.

For either an udpate install or a completely fresh install, there'sTonyMacx86.com's guide "Avoid APFS conversion on High Sierra update orfresh install".<https://www.tonymacx86.com/threads/guide-avoid-apfs-conversion-on-high-sierra-update-or-fresh-install.232855/>

A MacRumors.com forum topic also has the same information for an update install<https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/can-you-install-high-sierra-and-not-convert-to-apfs.2069134/>

Post by Robert PeirceHowever, it seems to be the case that other drives do not have toconvert, although I still don't know what the benefit is of not converting.

After a little more research I finally found that a drive can beconverted to APFS with no problem but can only be erased and reformattedto go back. If you have sufficient backups that isn't an issue.

I also found computers running High Sierra with APFS can't talk to olderreleases still using HPFS+ but can talk to computers running High Sierrawith HPFS+. I'm not sure that is an issue for me since I normally wouldupgrade all my computers.

Post by Robert PeirceHowever, it seems to be the case that other drives do not have toconvert, although I still don't know what the benefit is of not converting.

After a little more research I finally found that a drive can beconverted to APFS with no problem but can only be erased andreformatted to go back. If you have sufficient backups that isn't anissue.I also found computers running High Sierra with APFS can't talk toolder releases still using HPFS+ but can talk to computers running HighSierra with HPFS+. I'm not sure that is an issue for me since Inormally would upgrade all my computers.I have two MBPs with SSDs and a Mini with a standard hard disk.Are those the only reasons not to convert?

There are apps that have issues with the crappy new APFS and/or HighSierra. MacRumors.com has a forum topic has an extensive andcontinually updated list of the apps that do and do not work at<https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/macos-high-sierra-10-13-works-does-not-work-thread.2048660/>

Post by Your NameThere is a choice, but it's a bit of a muck-about to do it compared toApple simply having the option in the installer's GUI, as it shouldhave been. :-\

Unless I am missing something these do not apply to SSD drives. Itappears to confirm that if you have an SSD drive you will be convertedto APFS.

Only the boot SSD drive is auto-converted to crappy APFS by the HighSierra installer. The links I gave in a follow-up post have a wayaround that using a Terminal command so that your drive does not getconverted when installing High Sierra. It's an option built into theinstaller, but due to Apple's own decisions there is no GUI access tothat option.

Post by Robert PeirceHowever, it seems to be the case that other drives do not have toconvert, although I still don't know what the benefit is of not converting.

Apple has (currently) pulled the plug on being able to convert harddrives, and by extension Fusion drives. It was possible in the betatest versions of High Sierra, but Apple decided that the issuesoutweigh the supposed benefits at the moment. Reportedly they arestill working on it and it may return in in a later High Sierra updateor subsequent version Mac OS X.

A "Fusion drive" is an Apple term for a normal hard drive with an addedSSD, all in the same enclosure, that appears to Mac OS X to be a singledrive. You can make your own using a separate hard drive and SSD.Either way it gives you the supposed advantages of both - lots ofstorage space with fast access to often-used data (including booting),but ignoring the fact that SSD has a built-in obselence factor, unlikea hard drive.

A "Fusion drive" is an Apple term for a normal hard drive with an addedSSD, all in the same enclosure, that appears to Mac OS X to be a singledrive. You can make your own using a separate hard drive and SSD.Either way it gives you the supposed advantages of both - lots ofstorage space with fast access to often-used data (including booting),but ignoring the fact that SSD has a built-in obselence factor, unlikea hard drive.

nonsense. hds are more likely to fail sooner than an ssd because theyhave moving parts. ssds are *very* reliable and *very* fast.

"Due to the characteristics of NAND flash, SSDs havea finite lifetime dictated by the number of writeoperations known as program/erase (P/E) cycles NANDflash can endure."

<https://itblog.sandisk.com/ssd-endurance-speeds-feeds-needs/>

A hard drive does not have any such in-built lifespan issue. Some harddrives last decades with no problems (I'm still using the same harddrive that shipped in may now-dead PowerMac G3 nearly 20 years ago -the drive now lives in an external USB enclosure). Some of course dohave issues a lot earlier, especially newer drives partly thanks torushed designs of drives and computers / enclosures, and the everincreasing capacity on the same physical disk size.

From SanDisk, one of the makers of the things ..."Due to the characteristics of NAND flash, SSDs havea finite lifetime dictated by the number of writeoperations known as program/erase (P/E) cycles NANDflash can endure."<https://itblog.sandisk.com/ssd-endurance-speeds-feeds-needs/>A hard drive does not have any such in-built lifespan issue.

yes it most certainly does have a built-in lifespan issue.

nothing lasts forever, including people.

Post by Your NameSome harddrives last decades with no problems (I'm still using the same harddrive that shipped in may now-dead PowerMac G3 nearly 20 years ago -the drive now lives in an external USB enclosure).

that's *extremely* unusual.

most hard drives won't last anywhere near that long, typically 3-5years.

Post by Your NameFrom SanDisk, one of the makers of the things ..."Due to the characteristics of NAND flash, SSDs havea finite lifetime dictated by the number of writeoperations known as program/erase (P/E) cycles NANDflash can endure."<https://itblog.sandisk.com/ssd-endurance-speeds-feeds-needs/>A hard drive does not have any such in-built lifespan issue. Some harddrives last decades with no problems (I'm still using the same harddrive that shipped in may now-dead PowerMac G3 nearly 20 years ago -the drive now lives in an external USB enclosure). Some of course dohave issues a lot earlier, especially newer drives partly thanks torushed designs of drives and computers / enclosures, and the everincreasing capacity on the same physical disk size.

We will all start worrying about your fears when large quantities ofSSDs start to fail en masse. It will make the news. So far, so good andwith a decent backup plan, so what? SSD benefits far exceed yourworries.Here's a just googled article from 2015<http://techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-theyre-all-dead> that allays my fears. I honestly don't know if techreport isa reputable link, but it supports my thesis, so there you go.

Post by Your NameFrom SanDisk, one of the makers of the things ..."Due to the characteristics of NAND flash, SSDs havea finite lifetime dictated by the number of writeoperations known as program/erase (P/E) cycles NANDflash can endure."<https://itblog.sandisk.com/ssd-endurance-speeds-feeds-needs/>A hard drive does not have any such in-built lifespan issue. Some harddrives last decades with no problems (I'm still using the same harddrive that shipped in may now-dead PowerMac G3 nearly 20 years ago -the drive now lives in an external USB enclosure). Some of course dohave issues a lot earlier, especially newer drives partly thanks torushed designs of drives and computers / enclosures, and the everincreasing capacity on the same physical disk size.

We will all start worrying about your fears when large quantities ofSSDs start to fail en masse. It will make the news. So far, so good andwith a decent backup plan, so what? SSD benefits far exceed yourworries.Here's a just googled article from 2015<http://techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-theyre-all-dead> that allays my fears. I honestly don't know if techreport isa reputable link, but it supports my thesis, so there you go.

There won't be any "en masse" failure because the write cycles will bedifferent for every user, operating system, and app usage ... but anSSD will definitely all fail at some point since they do have a limitedwrite cycle.

Although, if you're using two (or more) SSDs as a mirrored RAID array,then the likelihood is that both will fail at virtually the same timesince they will be writing the same data at basically the same time anduse up their write cycles at the same time.

Hard drives do not have any such problem. Like any of man-made product,they can of course suffer some form of mechanical failure, but that's adifferent issue entirely - it's not a "built-in obselesence", it'ssimple wear 'n' tear or production issues. Some drives can fail withinseconds while others can last decades, under the same level of usage.

Post by Your NameHard drives do not have any such problem. Like any of man-made product,they can of course suffer some form of mechanical failure, but that's adifferent issue entirely - it's not a "built-in obselesence", it'ssimple wear 'n' tear or production issues. Some drives can fail withinseconds while others can last decades, under the same level of usage.

So MTBF says that the best made HD can last indefinitely, regardless ofits weaknesses, whereas a SSD has a finite lifecycle but functions farbetter within its lifetime. There may be a allegory hidden within ourarguments. Where's Grimm when you need him?

Post by Your NameHard drives do not have any such problem. Like any of man-made product,they can of course suffer some form of mechanical failure, but that's adifferent issue entirely - it's not a "built-in obselesence", it'ssimple wear 'n' tear or production issues. Some drives can fail withinseconds while others can last decades, under the same level of usage.

So MTBF says that the best made HD can last indefinitely, regardless ofits weaknesses, whereas a SSD has a finite lifecycle but functions farbetter within its lifetime. There may be a allegory hidden within ourarguments. Where's Grimm when you need him?

The only real "weakness" of a hard drive is the data access speed ...personally I couldn't care less if it takes a couple of extarmicroseconds to read a file or a few more seconds to boot the computer,but apparently for the terminally impatient generation it is a massiveproblem. :-\

Post by Your NameThe only real "weakness" of a hard drive is the data access speed ...personally I couldn't care less if it takes a couple of extarmicroseconds to read a file or a few more seconds to boot the computer,but apparently for the terminally impatient generation it is a massiveproblem. :-\

I'm 71 and spend the majority of my time in a La-Z-Boy. I don't havemuch patience waiting for needlessly slow computer tasks. If you ain'tlike me, wait and see ;-)

Post by Your NameThe only real "weakness" of a hard drive is the data access speed ...personally I couldn't care less if it takes a couple of extarmicroseconds to read a file or a few more seconds to boot the computer,but apparently for the terminally impatient generation it is a massiveproblem. :-\

I'm 71 and spend the majority of my time in a La-Z-Boy. I don't havemuch patience waiting for needlessly slow computer tasks. If you ain'tlike me, wait and see ;-)

You also have to add in the fact that SSDs cost more for less storage.So an added personal choice is that I'd rather have a cheaper, biggercapacity drive that could potentially last "forever" than buy anover-priced, small capacity drive that *will* fail after X number ofwrite cycles.

Even if both types of drive consistently failed, it's cheaper andrequires less of them for the same storage capacity to keep replacinghard drives than SSDs.

From SanDisk, one of the makers of the things ..."Due to the characteristics of NAND flash, SSDs havea finite lifetime dictated by the number of writeoperations known as program/erase (P/E) cycles NANDflash can endure."<https://itblog.sandisk.com/ssd-endurance-speeds-feeds-needs/>

Indeed. And you'll be dead long before it becomes a issue.

--Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 70th day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3183Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.

True, but in cases of frequent reads but few writes, SSDs could welloutlast HDDs, which rack up wear and tear from writes *and* reads aswell as from just spinning. As a practical matter, the probability thatany storage device will fail rises with longer use and more calendarage. Within the time span that most devices are kept in service, thegreater potential write life of an HDD doesn't make much difference.

Post by Robert PeirceI have backup drives, data drives, etc., all of which can be accessed bythe MBP as well as other computers, like my Mini. Do I need to convertthem? How do I do that and what happens if I don't?

no need and it's better if you don't.

I'm ok with no need but why is i better?

Some reasons to avoid APFS on external drives:

- APFS volumes won't be accessible if connected to a Mac booted into anolder major OS version.

- You cannot use APFS on Time Machine backup drives. They must continueto use HFS+.

For general data storage on hard drives, the only reasons to prefer APFSwould be if you want to use features that are unique to APFS, e.g. awider Unicode character set in filenames, clones, free space sharingbetween volumes in the same container.